Didn't they try some form of licencing for crossbows many moons ago? I think it was going to be $60 for 5 years, but it was never brought into force. What if they did the same sort of thing for any airgun or airsoft related guns?

Although if the government couldn't get it done for crossbows, they probably might not want to bother with airsoft.. but it's worth a shot.

I personally think it would help if airguns and airsoft were lumped together into a single category. When some people think about airguns, they think about kids shooting tin cans and that boy from the Christmas Story who almost shot his eye out. Lately the word airsoft = replica firearms, idiots using them irresponsibly, and are sometimes used in crimes. Not a very positive image.

It's easy for most people here (ASC) to act responsibly when it comes to airsoft, but it's other people actions that ruin it for all. Whether it be dumb kids or those who wish to use them to commit crimes. I agree with those who think some type of licencing might be the answer.

Regardless, whatever is to be done.. it needs to start now.

The trouble with that ... is we are not talking about a new classification for airsoft...

Both airguns and Replicas are currently Proscribed under current laws..

Airsoft guns are both airguns ( not restricted ) and Replicas ( prohibited)

So what we are talking about is having some sort of " special status " for airsoft guns outside of the current Law.

The Brits solved this problem with "Written in" defenses for trade and possession of replicas ( or Realistic Imitations as they call them) based on a "legitimate need" clause in the law. our law has no provision for written in defenses.. The legitimate need for individuals in the UK is for historical re-enactment.. it is the same law that allows people to own swords and spears and bows in the UK all which are illegal under the law.

Our law places the "legitimate need" provision on the transfer end of things.. and requires both the transferer and the transferee to have a business Firearms License..

For example it is ok for a licensed business to sell replicas to another licensed business... a legal importer can sell replicas to a prop house for example.. or to a movie armourer.. or to a training facility.. both entities have a "legitimate need"

the issue is that individuals have no "legitimate need" for replicas in the perception of the Law in Canada.. so access to replicas is legally out of reach for individuals. Which is the intent of the law..

We are talking about changing the law to allow individuals access to replicas... this would be a reversal of the government position that has been in place since 1998 when replicas were specifically proscribed to eliminate that access.

This would be exactly the same as asking the government to reverse their position on proscribing "assault rifles" as prohibited.. why would they? because some people would like to own them? Because their hobby happens to be the collecting and shooting of Assault rifles.. and because they want to they should be allowed?
Not likely...